Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1887-01-13
mental aud through commerce, and also
at the foreign commerce OF the country.
MR.. CRISP'S CONSTRUCTION.


tween Messrs. Mitchell and George on
the subject of the fourth section, Mr.
Hoar read letter from one of the House
cOnferees Mr.. Crisp) In reply to Ques-
tons of his as to the Interpretation which
the House conferees placed on the long
and short haul provisions. Mr.. Crisp,
speaking only for himself, in the absence
of the other TWO conterees, Messrs. Rea-
gan and Weaver, to the fret question as to
whether the prohibition would prevent a
common carrier receiving a lar er sum in
proportion for a shorter than for Il longer
period, or only that the amount OF the
entire freight for the less distance shall
not exceed the entire freight tor the
greater distance, MIR. Crisp replies: II
understand that the fourth sectiOn will
prevent a common carrier, within the
meaning of the act, from
receiving larger sum in
the aggregate for the transportation of
passengers or property for shorter than
for a longer distance over the same line in
thessame direction. In other words, the
amount of the entire freight for the less
distance (inciuded in the greater dis
tance shall not exceed the amount Of the
entire freight tor the greater distance on
a similar article under similar circum-
stances"
AN EXAMPLE.
The second question was: Suppose q
thousand barrels of -four be taken from
Chicago to Boston aud be thence con-
veyed to Europe, and another thousand
barrels OF -four be taken from Chicago to
Boston or Worcester a point nearer
Chicago on the same line) destined for
home consumption. are these substan-
liallv similar circumstances within the
meaning of the bill? In other words,
does mere difference in the destination
of property create the dissimilar circum-
stances and conditions contemplated in
section four?'
To this question Mr.. Crisp replies: "In
my Judgment the difference in the case
cited by you would not create dissimilar
circumstances"
The third question was: "Does the
existence OF competition at the
end of longer distance
(Which does not exist at the end
OF a suorter on the same line) make a
difference OF circumstances and condi-
tiOns within the intention OF the trainers
of the bIllW
To this question Mr.. Crisp replies: "In
my opinion IL does not.''
Mr.. Mitchell continued his argument
against the bill at great length.
When ne had concluded, Mr.. CuIIOm
stated that there were three or four Sena-
tors VINO desired to speak on the bill, and
who had engagements for this evening
He would not, therefore, ask for a vote
tonight, but would do so before adjourn
ment tomorrow.
Mr.. Harris asked unanimous consent to
have the vote taken tomorrow, but Mr..
AldrIch objected.
MIR. Colqultt presented petition from
Atlanta, Ga. on the subject of the inter-
state commerce bill. 1t was ordered
printed. After a secret session the Sen
ate adjourned.
IN THE HOUSE.
In the House to-day the Speaker an
nOunced the appointment of Messrs.
Skinner, Pealaud and Perkins as con
ferees on the bill for the allotment of land
in severalty TO Indians.
The floor was then under the special
order accorded to the Committee on the
judiciary.
Mr.. Collins, of Massachusetts, called
up the bill providing an additional Cir
cult Judge in the Second Judicial circuit.
1t passed.
The House then proceeded to the con-
sideration OF the Edmunds anti -pOlygamy
bill, and Mr.. fuckers substitute there.
for.
FOUR HOURS FOR DEBATE.
After the reading of both measures Mr.
Tucker, OF Virginia, stated that be would
permit the debate to continue for four
hours, to be divided between the friends
and opponents OF the bill.
Mr.. Bennett, of North Carolina, one of
the siRners OF the minority report, con-
sidered the time inadequate. He would
consent TO it because he could not get any
more. In his opinion portions of this far
reaching measure we're simply atrocious.
Il. b. Taylor, OF Ohio, opened the de-
bate in speech in favor Of the bill. He
was followed in order by Mr.. Caine, OF
Utah, in opposition, in q speech which
WOO for him the applause OF the House,
Mr.. Bennett, OF North Carolina, who op-
posed the bill upon the ground, among
others, that it was measure OF in
justice 10 helpless people and that it was
in part eX post factO legislation and IN
conflict with the decisions OF the Supreme
court of the United States, and In viola
tion Of the basic principles Of the Amer
ican government. Mr.. Bennett also OBJ
iected to it because 1t mposed TEST
oath" upon all male Inhabitants OF Utah.
MIR. TUCKER'S CLOSING SPEECH.
Mr.. Reed, OF Maine, and Mr. Casweil, OF
Wisconsin. supported, and Randolph
Tucker. OF Virginia, closed the debate.
he said ne was confronted with a speech
delivered by himself four or five years ago
against the EdmundR anti-Dolygamy bill.
(Inis was an AllusIon 10 the fact that
copies of that speech mad been distrIbut ed
upon the desks Of the members). He
gupposed that this speech had been
brought forward TO embarrass him. But
il did not embarrass In the iull and
ample consideration he had given Tie
Mormon question in connection with the
pending bill, he had taken into fulI ac-
count the views expressed by him on
that occasion. lie had then uttered no
with the mild and just provisions OF the
pending bill. Tnere was only one
point on which there 81 emed to be a con-
tradictIon, and that point mad been set
tied by the supreme Court. The Su-
preme Court had neld that there was no
right OF suffrage by any inhabitant Of q
Territory as there was a right OF suffrage
Nv cit zen OF state, that absolute
question Of Ihe government OF territories
was in the power OF Congress, subject to
the constitution. and that whether a man
or woman should be allowed To vote was
a question for Congress 10 decide,
THE COMMITTEES CONCLUSION.
There mad never been question brought
TO the attention Of the committee that had
been examined with more earnest care.
and the committee had come to the con.
olusion that something must be done IL
the United states did not desire TO declare
that they were unable to cope with the
question OF Mormonism. The territory OF
the United States did not belong TO the
first little squad OF men w0ich came and
,,ns M a.fd CIV A ra y,,n.